This thing is difficult to be feasible in practice @Wuhuoqiu used to be a VC, so I'll just talk about the VC's perspective First, let's talk about the premise: >Firstly, VC investment itself is a property of mutual assistance and spin off, which is very similar to the "resonance" of VDS in the past (new entrants can check it out) That is to say, the lower the level, the higher the price, and the greater the supply. But the prerequisite is that the previous layer must be fully filled. The premium between the next level and the previous level is artificially determined rather than discovered by secondary market prices For example, if a public chain is pre set at 50M, Seed at 200M, TGE may be 500M. These valuations are artificially formulated by the project team and the exchange. On this link, there are various mature liquidity solutions and 1.5 level market "consensus" (such as OTC coin selling) VC business earns paper wealth that is "certain" and not affected by secondary games >Secondly, especially for North American venture capitalists, they rarely use their own money, and the vast majority use very low-cost, fundraising funds. This often leads to their philosophy being: -Have patience -Not afraid of a single project going to zero -But there is a possibility of 100x with just one move Then returning to Old Bai's idea, this approach is equivalent to: -The only effective fundraising for the project is through VC rounds -Unlock TGE with around 10-20% of original VC chips What problems will this lead to: TGE cannot offer a premium greater than the VC round Because the project party only has the money raised from the VC round valuation, and this part of the chips was unlocked on Day 1. Exchanges, retail investors, market makers, and investors all know this If there is a premium here, who will foot the bill? 2. There is no investment value for VC Since there is no certainty about the next premium for VC, and even if TGE can really pour all the money into retail investors to exit, even the previous VC with discounts will not have many multiples They have no significance in participating 3. It is also meaningless to the project team I assume that the project team is not doing anything wrong and wants to take the long run. The original logic: -Pre TGE farming promotes user growth -During TGE, the circulating chips only consist of the actual airdrop distribution, MM liquidity provision, and exchange activity chips, generally less than 10% (mostly less than 5%) The current logic: -TGE is about to unlock 10-20% of the chips -There is simply no budget to achieve months long user growth. The practice of pre TGE farming obtaining an ICO whitelist has only been possible for a few top tier projects in the history of bull markets, and generally cannot hold off such a long market attention -The cost of listing cannot be saved by one cent -Being unable to do high valuations means that the project team cannot leave enough market value buffer before unlocking their own tokens. Not saying zero is not zero, it's like working hard for half a day and letting retail investors and exchanges make money If that's the case, what kind of product would the project team have to go to so much trouble to raise money from VC and bear the cost themselves to make? Anyway, there is no room for premium in second level games The closest approach to this idea is actually the money market, such as Slerf and Bome Of course, their approach is the opposite. First, they will engage in a high average cost FOMO game, pull it up and trap people, and then consider what products to make in order to gain more opportunities This process doesn't require the project team, just MM is enough This is also the biggest PMF I think Hyperliquid's HIP-3 has